The Life and Teachings of Elsa Gindler. - Rosen Journal

R M I J . . .
Volume 4 Issue 1, 2011
In this instance however, without clear details, dates, etc., my colleagues were not willing to accept my
anecdotal comments as proof nor would they accept the statements about this that Elaine Mayland made in
her book, and so we researched further. One of the authors is German and so he could go to references that
I could not read. I must admit now that to this date, no one has been able to find any proof that Lucy Heyer
studied with Elsa Gindler. I was shocked and after more than one year I am still, frankly, uncomfortable with
this. Unfortunately the facts are leaning to the other side and consequently in our article I had to agree that
we write: “…but, as Gindler never left Berlin, and Lucy Heyer never lived in Berlin, it seems to be very unlikely.
It could be that she took part in courses that Gindler gave outside Berlin, e.g. on the island of Sylt in the
North Sea, but there is no confirmation from autobiographical statements of Heyer, nor from people staying
with her together in a Gindler class, nor from any written records” (Geuter, et al. 2010, Vol. 5, No. 1, Pp 59-73).
Geuter et al. also write that Lucy Heyer “…was the wife of psychotherapist Gustav Heyer, but separated
from him in 1933. Consequently she did not follow Heyer to Berlin in 1939…” “From 1932 to 1945, Lucy
Heyer practiced in Munich as a psychotherapist. After the war, she became known in Germany for a book on
psychotherapy and breath training (Heyer-Grote, 1970).”
Even after the publication of our article we are still researching. In September of last year I received an
email from one of my colleagues with whom I wrote the article. It said, “today I got mail from historian of
psychoanalysis Regine Lockot who years ago had two long oral history interviews with Lucy Heyer-Grote.
She has checked for us all her handwritten notes of the two interviews and wrote me that she found no
mentioning of any training in Berlin or with Gindler” (email communication from Geuter, 2009).
It seems that we do have an upset here. In one way it is very frustrating that things we believed may not
be true or that we can’t put all the little pieces together neatly and clearly. The knowledge and the links, if
we have them, certainly enrich and deepen our backgrounds and the field of work. And on the other hand,
in my humble opinion, it really doesn’t matter who did what in the past and exactly what connections we
can or cannot make. I think it is wonderful that we are able to find correlations. It is mostly inspiring and
exciting to me that some very fine teachers (in this case, women, coming from the same country), in doing
their own work in their own individual ways and singular histories, found common tracks and voiced similar
opinions and developed wonderful, deep, sensitive work to pass on to their students. Of course how could
it not be similar? If we are working for the benefit and wholeness of the human being it is not a surprise to
me that we would come up with similar ways of working. The importance to me is that the work was created
and developed and that it is being passed on to others. And may it go out into the world in myriad ways!
References
Geuter, U., Heller, M. C., & Weaver, J. O. (2010). Elsa Gindler and her influence on Wilhelm Reich and body psychotherapy.
Body, Movement and Dance in Psychotherapy, 5, (1), 59-73.
Huebner, M. (2010). The life and teachings of Elsa Gindler. Rosen Method International Journal, 3, 17-21.
22
Commentary